What's worse: unowned directories or multiple owners?
Ralf Corsepius
rc040203 at freenet.de
Tue Mar 28 17:39:30 UTC 2006
On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 10:32 -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Maybe the third time is the charm:
>
> I want to install a file into /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/ but I don't
> want to Requires: /usr/share/emacs/site-list/.
It would have to be
Requires(pre): usr/share/emacs/site-list
because otherwise rpm won't be able to handle this correctly.
> Do I own
> /usr/share/emacs... in my package or do I leave open the possibility
> that the dir is unowned if emacs in not installed?
I definitely prefer multiple ownerships on dirs, because otherwise
"rpm -e multiple packages" won't handle it correctly and can cause
orphaned directories to stay around in a system.
Of cause there exists the permission's issue on multiply owned dirs, but
if packages are packaged correctly and don't try to play tricks with
ownerships/permissions, this should be a non-issue.
Ralf
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list